“Stand with Hong Kong”:
Lennon Wall and Participatory Politics in Taiwan

Qi Zheng1

1 Doctoral Candidate, Institute of Social Research and Cultural Studies, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University

民衆の抗議の声を落書きやメモの形で公共の場所に掲出するレノン・ウォールが、香港の民主化運動に連帯する形で台湾をはじめとする各地に出現した。その運動の実態と背景を探った。

Abstract

With sticky notes, posters and decorations on the walls which evidence the development of the the Anti-Extradition
Law Amendment Bill Movement and disseminate a supportive sentiment to the protests, the Lennon Walls haveexisted in many parts of the world. From Bangkok, Hanoi, Tokyo, Seoul, Toronto, Melbourne, London to New York,
people recreate the walls in their cities into sites to stand with Hong Kong. Mentioning the Lennon Walls of Taiwan,
people in different cities regenerate the walls in public space into the medium that propagate the protests in HK,
express their hatred of “China” and even mobilize political campaigns during the president election in January
2020. On the basis of fieldwork in Taipei, Hsinchu and Taichung, the project intends to investigate in what ways are
the Lennon Walls deployed politically considering the complex condition of mainland China, HK and Taiwan.
Specifically, the research hopes to answer the following questions: How do the people exploit the walls in public
space and transform these sites into the political sphere? In what aspects do various social groups shape or reflect
to the walls? What are the lost voices that the Lennon Wall conceal since the walls claim to be open and democratic
platforms for public expression?
Keywords

Lennon Wall, Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement, Taiwan, alternative media

1. Introduction

With sticky notes, posters and decorations on thewalls which showcase the development of the AntiExtradition Law Amendment Bill Movement and disseminate a supportive sentiment to the protesters, theLennon Walls “blossom everywhere” from Hong Kongto many parts of the world in 2019. Inheriting theanti-authoritarianism spirit of the original Lennon Wallof Prague, the new Lennon Walls entail the style of
Democracy Wall, which was a tool of the Chinese
Communist Party to encourage free speech in politicalstruggles. In the late 1970s, the Democracy Wall locatedat the junction of West Chang’an Avenue and Xidan
North Avenue in Beijing denoted the beginning of democratic movements in PRC. People diffused ideas,

discussed political issues, and criticized the socialist
system by posting big-character posters and articles on
the wall. The Chinese Democracy Wall Movement is thefirst non-governmental effort to fight for the space ofindependent speech since 1949 (Chen, 2006). Ten years
later, graffiti manifesting the anger and dissatisfaction
with Gustáv Husák’s Communist regime appeared on
Prague’s Lennon Wall in 1988. The Occupy Central
movement in 2014 and the Anti-Extradition Law
Amendment Bill Movement in 2019 witnessed the reappearance of Lennon Wall in public spaces in and outside
Hong Kong. These walls have become iconic landscapesthat connect the scenes of Hong Kong’s protests with theconsciousness of people from other regions of the world.
Mentioning the Lennon Walls of Taiwan, people in149

Qi Zhengdifferent cities revitalize the walls in public space into
vessels that propagate the protests in HK, display theirhatred of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) and evenmobilize political campaigns during the presidential
election in January 2020. This study hopes to analyze
the social actors involved in the evolution of Taiwan’s
Lennon Walls and the politicization of the walls inpublic spaces. Specifically, the research hopes to answer
the following questions: How do people exploit the wallsin the public space and transform these sites into thepolitical sphere? In what aspects do various social actors
shape or reflect on the walls? What are the lost voicesthat the Lennon Wall conceal since the walls seem to beopen space for public expression? Firstly, the historicalinvestigation and literature review of the conceptions
related to the Lennon Wall is going to be conducted toilluminate the path for this research. To follow with, aconceptual frame of alternative media will be elaborated to discuss the Lennon Walls in Taiwan from threeperspectives. In the conclusion section, the paper reveals
how the contextualisation of the Lennon Wall can be
devoted to broadening the scope of alternative media.

2. The Democracy Wall

Looking back at the history of the wall as a place andmedium of public expression in social movements, there
are two primary historical contexts. One is the Democracy
Wall inspired by the May Fourth Movement’s advocation of liberty and democracy, which contains Chinese
intellectuals’ pursuit of free speech. Between 1978 and
1979, big-character posters with dissents and politicalopinions were posted on the brick wall of Xidan Street,
Xicheng District of Beijing. These posters called for theeradication of Chairman Mao worship and the realization of political democracy. This critical inheritance ofthe big-character poster’s Pidou (批鬥, to criticize anddenounce someone at a public meeting) function fromthe Chinese Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) played avital role in the late 1970s’ ideological emancipation andpower struggle inside the CCP. Deng Xiaoping, who
supported the Democracy Wall movement, came into
power at the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central
Committee of the CCP in 1978. To consolidate the new150

leadership, the “noisy” voices from below were finallysuppressed. In November 1979, the Second Session of
the 5th National People’s Congress resolved to ban the
Democracy Wall.
Although the Xidan Democracy Wall was officiallyprohibited, its form and spirit remain on the campusesof Hong Kong’s universities. In 2017 and 2018, postersof “Hong Kong independence” existed on the Democracy
Walls of the University of Hong Kong (HKU), theChinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) and theHong Kong Polytechnic University (PolyU). Mainland
Chinese students and local students confronted eachother at the Democracy Wall of CUHK. Printed internet
memes were utilised by mainland Chinese students tocover the full-page posters. These hilarious memes wereappropriated from social media platforms to physicalspaces and entertainingly responded to political issues.
Neither the anonymous “Hong Kong Independence”
poster nor the memes pasted on the wall complied withthe “Rules Regarding the Use of Democracy Wall”
declared by the Student Union of CUHK1. The destructive and retaliatory usages of the Democracy Wall went
against the original intention of setting up the walls on
campus.

3. The Lennon Wall and Hong Kongprotests

The wall located at Grand Priory Square, Malá
Strana has been garnished with John Lennon’s portrait,anti-war slogans and other symbolic materials since the1980s. Young Czechs wrote about their dissatisfaction
over the communist regime following John Lennon’s
pursuit of freedom in 1988. After the collapse of theCommunist regime, the Lennon Wall became a symbolof free speech and a global landmark against communism. The recreated Lennon Walls nowadays, as venues
for supporting Hong Kong protesters, rarely use graffiti,
but mostly paste sticky notes, paper posters and otherdecorations on the walls of public spaces. In otherwords, the rebirth and proliferation of the Lennon Walls
1 The rules demand that signatures of the writers or producers
should be noted on the posters.

6th AFC Best Papers

in the Hong Kong protests are close to the style of the
Democracy Wall while follows the anti-authoritarian
connotation of the Prague Lennon Wall.
The Lennon Wall first appeared in Hong Kong during
the Umbrella Movement in 2014. The wall by the protesters at Central Government Complex, Admiralty,
was regarded as part of the occupation movement. The
new Lennon Wall with post-it notes of protesters
attracted the attention of several researchers. Pan (2015)
believes the Lennon Wall is a re-declaration of people’s
non-commercial use of public space, and a visual pattern of public communication or expression. Besides
being part of the protesters’ spatial practice, the Lennon
Wall in Hong Kong also acts as an emotional connection
entity. For instance, Lin (2016) determines it as a formof live alternative media that enables the face-to-faceexchange of sentiments and motivations. Adopting thisinterpretation of the Lennon Wall as a medium, thestudy continues to explore the forces that shape thealternative media in Taiwan.
If Prague’s original Lennon Wall and the Lennon
wall in the Umbrella Movement are the created media ina single specific location by dissenters, the AntiExtradition Law Amendment Bill Movement in 2019has transmitted the rebellious icon to the globe. In
Taiwan and South Korea, vandals attempted to destroy
the walls, which caused verbal and even physical conflicts. To fight against external damages, the initiators ofthese Lennon Walls turned to local administrative
authorities and proceeded with legitimate applicationsof public use. From 2014 to 2019, the contributors andparticipants of the Lennon Walls have expanded fromprotesters to a wider range of people. After looking backto the history of the Democracy Wall and Lennon Wallin the past, this paper pays attention to the present andattempts to imagine the possible future of these spacesthat are employed politically by the public.

4. Conceptual framework

Spatially, the hundreds of Lennon Walls that emergedon the streets of Hong Kong during the Anti-Extradition
Law Amendment Bill Movement showcased certain
publicity. The particularity of Taiwan’s Lennon Walls isthat they mushroomed outside the geographical realm ofHong Kong’s protests, and developed vigorously withthe participation of various social forces. The Lennon
Walls in Taiwan seem to be ideal public spaces as everyone who stand in front of the walls has the right to write
their own opinions or respond to others’ words throughpost-it notes. Such spaces seem to be the place of citizenship “where citizens bodies, words, actions, and produce were all literally on mutual display” (Hartley,
1992, p. 29-30; Mitchell, 1995, p. 116). Nevertheless, theLennon Walls, as a production of social movement, arethe spaces constructed by the society. This article
regards the Lennon Walls in Taiwan as a genre of alternative media and discusses the actors concerning the
progress of these spectacles.
Briefly, the author defines the concept of alternative
media from two dimensions: the mode of production
and the content. Alternative media contains the conventional forms of newspaper, radio and television, online
media (such as blogs) and other expressive practices(graffiti, performance art) (Hu, 2009). Compared withthe mainstream media of “large scale, concentrated capital and technology” (Hamilton, 2000; Downing, 2008;
Wang & Li, 2017, p. 94-95), alternative media embraces
a more participatory mode of production which emphasizes the audiences’ or the public’s creation, production
and dissemination, contributes to wider communities
and creates alternative public sphere (Atton, 2002;
Kuang, 2017). When the general public become the contributors of media creation, self-empowered people
could also express their opinions on behalf of themselves and the community that they belong to (Luo,2012). Relying on the dynamic, equal, and collaborative
procedure, productions of participatory communication
can be achieved by alternative media with the deployment of new media technologies,
Alternative media manifests the feature of resistanceconsidering the aspect of the content. Pajnik andDowning (2008) describe the alternative media in social
or political movements as a resistant performance orspectacle consisted of power, ideology and opposition(p. 33). They pointed out the three elements of alternative media: alternative content, interpretive strategies151

Qi Zhengand production (Ibid, p. 22) to emphasize the deployedwords, images, sound or video that challenge the power
structure and the audience’s capacity to identify, understand and create the content.
According to the previous case studies, alternative
media accompanying political movements entails various forms (Downing, 2001). For instance, alternative
videos and underground radio performed “as a tool tofight against politics and mainstream media” in the mid1980s of Taiwan (Kuang, 2011, p. 111). In Lee’s (2015)
investigation of Hong Kong’s online alternative media,
alternative media managers were social celebrities orgroups that embraced more aggressive political positions (Kuang, 2017, p. 127). As a result, those media
platforms would engage in political activities as theircontributors coalesced due to shared ideas.
The Lennon Wall in Prague and those reborn with
the Hong Kong protests can be interpreted as a particular genre of alternative media. While regenerating thewalls in public spaces, these spectacular media havebeen developed and enriched with the public’s participation. Depending on the primary data of fieldwork observations and textual images, this research will analyze
the participatory, resistant, and political attributes of the
Lennon Walls in Taiwan while noting the legitimationof these sites.

5. Methodology

The research methods of this paper include historicalinvestigation, fieldwork and textual analysis. The historical approach in the second and third section of the study
focusing on academic articles, books, and online
materials has probed the existence and evolvement of
the Democracy Wall and Lennon Walls. For the fieldwork part, the author visited nine Lennon Walls of
Taiwan in three months to obtain first-hand data for
analysis. In 2019, the author conducted a series of fieldwork from September 15 to December 24: National
Taiwan University (Student Activity Centre), Ximen
Station (a mobile Lennon Wall); National Yang Ming
Chiao Tung Univerisity (Assembly Building, Student
Activity Centre), National Tsing Hua University, GrandEast-Gate pedestrian underpass of Hsinchu; Taichung’s

152

Old Railway Station, Kuang San SOGO pedestrian
underpass.

6. Discussion

6.1. From cultural citizenship to participatory
democracy
From the Democracy Wall of mainland China to the
Lennon Walls in Prague and Hong Kong, the walls inpublic spaces possess new functions and meanings in
the pursuit of democracy and free speech. Transforming
the arena in daily life into the public sphere, the contributors revive original walls in creative ways. Taking
Hsinchu’s Grand-East-Gate pedestrian underpass as an
example, the initiators arranged the underpass as a
Lennon Wall. Anyone who passes through the space isthus able to use the sticky notes and pens provided byhim to leave their own words or ideas. Then, the GrandEast-Gate not only accommodates leisure and entertainment activities but also serves as a venue for civic
communication and information dissemination.
As the expressive space set up spontaneously by the
public, the Lennon Walls play a role in larger-scale networking as well. On the evening of September 29, 2019,
in the plaza of Grand-East-Gate, a film screening event
was held to support Hong Kong protesters. The 35th
Hong Kong Film Awards Best Film Ten Years (十年 in
Chinese), the first story of which can be regarded as apolitical prophecy was screened (It tells the government’s executed plan to shoot two party leaders tofoment public support for legislation of the National
Security Law in 2025). The film screening was followedby public panel discussions about local and universal
issues proposed by a professor from the discipline ofChina studies. After the event, photos of the night wereposted on the Facebook profile of Hsinchu Lennon Wall,a virtual version of the Lennon Wall established incyberspace. As a result, the Lennon Wall in physicalspace connects to the virtual space in a global context as
the assembly claims to be part of the anti-authoritarian
activities in more than 65 cities around the world. The
civic action places the city of Hsinchu in the global context, which created cross-space activism. Individual citizens’ appearance and discursive practices in public6th AFC Best Papers

space due to the concerning of Hong Kong protests
implies the cultural dimension of citizenship. Cultural
citizenship is a fundamental facet of citizenship that
includes the right to express, the right to be represented,
and the right of social participation based on sharedinterests, identities or concerns (Zobl, E & Drüeke, 2012,
p. 204; Burgess & Green, 2018, p. 77). The concept not
only pays attention to the participatory actions such as
reading, consumption, celebration, and criticism in thefield of popular culture but also the mobilisation role of
new media in daily cultural practice. Individuals in different places who are concerned about Hong Kong
through social media established the Lennon Wall, participate in the process of information dissemination
during the construction of this public alternative media.
Figure 1-2 were shot at the Lennon Wall in Taichung
Old Railway Station. The partition wall between thesquare and the train track was used as a platform for
pasting sticky notes. On the left side of the wall is a propaganda message saying “What Taiwanese can do”,
which systematically summarizes the actions that
Taiwanese people can take instantly. Since “Vote in2020 to defend Taiwan” was marked as a mandatorytask, the public’s reflection of Hong Kong protests andthe upcoming election in Taiwan converged at the operational level.
As a genre of alternative media, the Lennon Walls
resemble performance venues, rather than platforms

that provide professional news production. Throughpeople’s practices of writing, posting and expression,these participatory communications exceed the local
community and result in global conjunction with the
deployment of social media (Luo, 2012, p. 14). Under
the specific circumstances of the 2020 Taiwanese presidential election, the established Lennon Walls became
the territories of participatory politics.
6.2. Battles beyond the wall
In addition to political mobilization, the sprout ofalternative media also embodies different processes ofsocial interaction. In mid-October, 2019, the author was
attracted by the dialogues between simplified and traditional Chinese characters, as well as English words
during the second visiting of the Lennon Wall at
National Tsinghua University. As is shown by Figure 3,
on the left of the black words “tyranny must die” (redpaper), “China has no tyranny” was written on a yellow
sticky note in simplified Chinese. The note was followed
by a traditional Chinese response: open your eyes andface reality? Moreover, at the bottom of the photo, one
simplified Chinese note claimed that “There is no tyranny in China~Under the leadership of the Communist
Party, the Chinese people are very happy” while next to
the words was a traditional Chinese comment: I dare you
to curse Xi Jinping. Referring to Figure 4, on the samenote written “Shameful to Taiwan’s DEMOCRACY”,

Figure 1-2: the Lennon Wall at Taichung Old Railway Station (December, 2019)

153

Qi Zheng

Figure 3-4: the Lennon Wall at National Tsinghua University (October, 2019)the latecomer corresponded by “Go build your own!!”.
These dialogues debates indicated that the wall was nolonger just a place to support Hong Kong or a space fordisseminating Hong Kong protest information.
Considering the future of this regenerated wall, whether
it will be shaped like the ground of unilateral self-expression and political declaration, or devolve into thealternative public sphere conveying diverse opinions
and even debates is still unclear.
Compared to the Lennon Wall in fixed places, thepublic gathering formed around the mobile Lennon
Wall is another form of a performance venue. The
mobile Lennon Wall is an innovative style that has
appeared in Hong Kong, Tokyo, Vancouver, Taiwan andother cities since July 2019. Facing the oppositions that
may be triggered by the Lennon Wall in public spaces,
people came up with the idea of temporary posting andcollection activities to support Hong Kong, hoping thatsuch a flexible way of contention would avoid unnecessary conflicts. On the evening of November 15, 2019,
Taiwanese people launched the “Mobile Lennon Wall
Stands with Hong Kong” action at Exit 6 of Taipei
Ximen MRT Station (Figure 5). The black-clothed man
wearing a yellow helmet on the right side of the photo
kept telling the onlookers about the police brutality in
Hong Kong and calls for post-it notes to support the protesters. The man at the centre was wearing a V-shaped
mask, an anti-totalitarian symbol derived from the154

movie V for Vendetta. The mask has appeared the social
protests in South Korea, the Philippines, Chile, Spainand other parts of the world (the image of V for Vendetta
also appeared on the Lennon Wall of old Taichung
Railway Station, see Figure 1). the mobile Lennon Wallis more like the art of street performance. Although theevent took place on the landmark of Taipei, the highpitched Cantonese slogans of “Free Hong Kong, revolution now. Five demands, not one less.” and theever-increasing post-it notes forged an atmosphere ofresistance across geographical divisions.

Figure 5: M obile Lennon Wall at Exit 6 of Taipei Ximen MRT
Station (November, 2019)

6th AFC Best Papers

6.3. The lost voice
The formation and evolution of the Lennon Walls
concern several social forces in Taiwan. Most of the renovated walls are existing walls in public spaces, whichmeans initiators, as well as administrators, play a vitalrole in the appearance of Lennon Walls. the student
unions of National Taiwan University, National Tsinghua
University, and Yang Ming Chiao Tung University all
signified the legitimacy of their established Lennon Walls
acknowledged by the universities through announcements. In response to the destruction of the Lennon
Walls at the National Taiwan University and National
Tsinghua University, both student unions reported thecase to the police. The recognition from administrative
authorities or the government can objectively transform
Lennon Walls into a legal and protected space.
The participants and audience of the Lennon Walls
are more than local people, politicians or Hong Kong
people who live in Taiwan. On the Lennon Walls of
Taichung Old Railway Station, National Taiwan
University, messages supporting Hong Kong were written in English (indicated that the writer is from Japan orSouth Korea), Malay, Spanish and other languages.
Defined as a form of participatory alternative media,
these Lennon Walls could be situated in an internationallandscape where people circulate ideas, diffuse information and unleash their creativity.
Among the audiences of the Lennon Walls in Taiwan,
Mainland Chinese students have been perceived as enemies of freedom and democracy or the spoiler of the
Lennon Walls in online news and discussions. However,
it is doubtful whether students from China share the ideologies with the simplified Chinese words on the sticky
notes. As is pointed by an anonymous author on InitiumMedia, mainland Chinese students have been bothered
about the lack of basic rights, troubled in frustration andhelplessness2. The article also mentions that without thepossible path to resolutions, silence becomes the only
method to cope with the embarrassing situation in
Taiwan. Chinese students receive official notice to avoid

participating in political discussions or public debatefrom the local office for Taiwan affairs before obtaining
permission to enter Taiwan (Xu, 2019). Both the internalized external pressure and frustration in daily life
probably lead to the loss of Chinese students’ voices. For
individual Chinese students who pass by the Lennon
Walls wordlessly, their actual appearances have been
hidden from the negative image.

7. Conclusion

From the National Southwest Association University
and the Democracy Wall in Xidan to the Lennon Walls
have bloomed all over the world today, people convert
the walls in public spaces as expressive sphere whileembracing the pursuit of freedom of speech and thespirit of anti-authoritarianism. Meanwhile, these walls
are also challenged and impacted by destructive forces.
Accompanying the protests in Hong Kong, the Lennon
Walls spontaneously set up by the public surpassed thelimitation of geographic space and cohered with thesupport from all over the world. The jointly created
Lennon Walls in Taiwan combine varied social actors:
individuals and social groups as the initiators, the governments and universities as potential administrators,
and Taiwanese and international participants as theaudience. No matter they are legitimate or not, thesewalls are constantly being defined and developed bytheir participants.
In addition, the Lennon Walls also perform as links
for people to gather through innovation actions in thedigital age. Landmarks in cities extend to flash mob
events, public discussions and other civic or politicalactivities, evidencing that alternative media can be integrated into the agendas of local social action and mobilization. The walls have become a physical symbol in
the public space (Parkinson, 2012, p. 75), and the individual participants become part of the global “Stand
with Hong Kong” narrative through these anchor points.

References
Atton, Chris. 2002. Alternative Media. London, UK: SAGE.

2 See the (Chinese) article on https://theinitium.com/article/
20190928-taiwan-mainland-student/

Burgess, Jean, and Joshua Green. 2018. YouTube: Online Video andParticipatory Culture. John Wiley & Sons.

155

Qi ZhengChen, Yan. 2006. “The Democracy Wall Movement and its historicalstatus”. Contemporary China Studies. https://www.modernchi
nastudies.org/cn/issues/past-issues/92-mcs-2006-issue-2/956-201201-05-15-35-10.html
Downing, John. 2001. Radical Media: Rebellious Communicationand Social Movements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.
org/10.4135/9781452204994———. 2008. “Social Movement Theories and Alternative Media:
An Evaluation and Critique.” Communication, Culture & Critique
1 (1): 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-9137.2007.00005.x
Hamilton, James. 2000. “Alternative Media: Conceptual Difficulties,
Critical Possibilities.” Journal of Communication Inquiry 24 (4):357–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859900024004002
Hartley, J. 1992. The Politics of Pictures: The Creation of the Publicin the Age of Popular Media. London: Routledge.
Hu, Yong. 2009. Instruction to Info rhizome: Report on independent
media in the Chinese-speaking world. http://huyong.blog.sohu.
com/115419749.html
Kuang, Chung-Shiang. 2011. “A Voice for Minorities and AntiStigma: Alternative ‘Media’ and Cultural Action in Taiwan.”
Journal of Communication Research and Practice. 1(1): 105–35.
———. 2017. Comparing Historical Development and Predicamentof Alternative Media in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Communication,
Culture & Politics. 5: 119–51.
Lee, Francis L. F. 2015. Online alternative media, political communication and social mobilization. In LEE, Siu Nam Paul (eds.), New
century of Hong Kong press (p. 71–95.). HK: The Chinese
University of Hong Kong Press.
Lin, Zhongxuan. 2016. “Traditional Media, Social Media, andAlternative Media in Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement.” Asian
Politics & Policy 8 (2): 365–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/aspp.12258
Luo, Hui. 2012. The reconstruction of communication commons.
Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press (China).
Mitchell, Don. 1995. “The End of Public Space? People’s Park,
Definitions of the Public, and Democracy.” Annals of the
Association of American Geographers 85 (1): 108–33.
Pajnik, Mojca, and John Downing, eds. 2008. Alternative Media andthe Politics of Resistance: Perspectives and Challenges. Politike
Symposium. Ljubljana: Peace Inst.
Pan, Lu. 2015. Aestheticizing Public Space: Street Visual Politics inEast Asian Cities. Bristol, UK: Intellect Books.
Parkinson, John. 2012. Democracy and Public Space: The PhysicalSites of Democratic Performance. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Wang, Jiayi and Li, Gengyun. 2017. Who is using online alternative
media? A cultural research of the employment of alternative
media. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 39 (2):90–112.
Xu, Jiajia. 2019. “Opinions from Chinese students after the damageof Lennon Wall.” Newslab. https://newslab.pts.org.tw/video/64【P觀點】台大連儂牆被毀之後，陸生怎麼說？

Zobl, Elke, and Ricarda Drüeke. 2012. Feminist Media : Participatory
Spaces, Networks and Cultural Citizenship. transcript Verlag.
https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/31465.

156